For me, I'm far better at patterns than memorization. Words are superior to letters because I can often think back to an earlier word/phrase to find a letter. L

For me, I'm far better at patterns than memorization. Words are superior to letters because I can often think back to an earlier word/phrase to find a letter. Like, suppose you've done nothing but memorize how to key in the curse words. Starting from "... .... .. -" you're just 4 more letters from learning ".- ... ... .... --- .-.. ." And three away from "-.-. ..- -. -". From there it's just 2 letters to "..-. ..- -.-. -.-". 1 more gets you to "-... .. - -.-. ....". 2 more gets both ".--. . -. .. ..." and ".--. ..- ... ... -.--" (obviously can't have one without the other). At that point you've picked up enough of the alphabet that it's just two more to "-- --- - .... . .-. ..-. ..- -.-. -.- . .-." If you ever forget a letter, just think back to the curse words. I also like to organize the letters by complexity/similarity. The least complex are the letters that are the same symbol n times. E I S H for (1-4) dots and T M O for (1-3) dashes. Just ask yourself "IS HE TOM?" The next layer up is letters that are n dots followed by m dashes or vice versa. These are subgrouped into length 4 down to length 2 and ordered from left heavy to right heavy. So the taxonomy is [(1,1) A/N], [(2,1) U/G,(1,2) W/D], [(1,3)B, (2,2) Z, (3,1)V/J]. The third group is actually smaller and thus easier. [(1,1,1) R/K], [(2,1,1)F/Q, (1,2,1)P/X, (1,1,2) L/Y]. The final group is just (1,1,1,1) C. Writing out the table in terms of these similarities helps. Eg I'd often remember letters in terms of other letters that I use more frequently like "k is the opposite form of r (-.- vs .-.)". Or I would know where the letter sat in terms of layer or skew and I knew what letters it couldn't be. Eg for a while I knew N was length 2, I knew it wasnt .. or .- since I use I/A a lot, so it was just a matter of learning the difference between m (--) and n (-.), Which happens to be the same as the difference between w (.--) and u (..-) after you remove the first dot and turn the page upside down. Obviously u is upside down n and w is upside down m. For the occasional clusters of easily confused groups, learning one forces the others to snap into place. .-.. is off balance to the Left, so it must be L (..-.). -.. begins with a Dash so that one is D. .-- has twice the dashes as ..- so that makes it "double the U" aka W. P (.--.) is similar in shape and origin to rho so it makes sense for it to be similar to R (.-.). That's about as dense as I can compress it. The rest is rote learning.